Since there is no common Indo-European root for a transitive possessive verb have (notice that Latin "habeō" is not related to English "have"), Proto-Indo-European probably lacked the have structure. Instead, the third person forms of be were used, with the possessor in dative case, compare Latin mihi est / sunt, literally to me is / are. [1]

have ...? (third-personsingularhas ...?, third-person singular negativehasn't ...?orhas ... not?, negative for all other persons, singular and pluralhaven't ...?orhave ... not?); in each case, the ellipsis stands for a pronoun

Used with a following pronoun to form tag questions after statements that use "have" to form the perfect tense or (in UK usage) that use "have" in the present tense.

“We haven't eaten dinner yet, have we?”

“Your wife hasn't been reading that nonsense, has she?”

“I'd bet that student hasn't studied yet, have they?”

“You've known all along, haven't you?”

“The sun has already set, has it not?”

(UK usage) “He has some money, hasn't he?” (see usage notes below)

This construction forms a tag that converts a present perfect tense sentence into a question. The tag always uses an object pronoun substituting for the subject. Negative sentences use has or have, distinguished by number. Affirmative sentences use the same followed by not, or alternatively, more commonly, and less formally, hasn't or haven't. (See Appendix:English tag questions ).

In American usage, this construction does not apply to present tense sentences with has or have, or their negations, as a verb; it does not apply either to the construction "have got". In those cases, use "does" or its negation instead. For example: "He has some money, doesn't he?" and "I have got enough time, don't I?" These constructions with "do", "does", "don't" or "doesn't" are considered incorrect in UK usage.